|
Over lunch, former Bureau of Reclamation Commissioner Floyd Dominy provided a humorous
<br />and spirited presentation. He was at the helm during the Bureau's most active period of dam -
<br />building and development. Perceived by some as a controversial figure, Mr. Dominy fielded
<br />questions from the audience regarding what he might change if he were "able to do it all over again,"
<br />and what he would do if he were Commissioner today. Not afraid to state his opinion, he earnestly
<br />stated his dislike for the ESA and the conflicts it causes, and detailed a couple of smaller projects
<br />that he would not pursue if he were to repeat his role as Commissioner, while ardently restating his
<br />support of the construction Glen Canyon dam.
<br />The afternoon sessions featured tribal issues and watershed management, confidentiality in
<br />watershed processes, negotiation and evidentiary issues concerning scientific modeling and
<br />transactional due diligence. Council member Jeff Fassett, the former State Engineer from Wyoming,
<br />spoke on issues facing tribes from his experience in the Wind River basin of Wyoming. Tim
<br />Vollman, from Albuquerque, New Mexico, spoke on the value of the seniority of tribal water rights
<br />in light of ESA consultation. In the ethics component of the conference, Bradley Tellman, of the law
<br />firm Barran Liebman in Portland, Oregon, spoke of lawyer contact, conflict and confidentiality in
<br />dealing with experts and consultants. Cynthia Covell, of Alperstein & Covell in Denver, Colorado,
<br />addressed the topic of confidentiality and disclosure, and communication with government agencies
<br />and employees. During later breakout sessions, Steve Larson of S.S. Papadopulous & Associates
<br />in Bethesda, Maryland and Stuart L. Somach, of Somach, Simmons & Dunn in Sacramento,
<br />California, both addressed the use of modeling in litigation. During the transactional due diligence
<br />session, participants were provided an overview of basic state water laws, as well as due diligence
<br />checklists.
<br />Friday morning, Jerome Muys, of Muys & Associates of Washington, D.C. addressed the issue
<br />of equitable apportionment and interstate watershed protection and management. The conference
<br />continued with a panel discussion on inter jurisdictional watershed management moderated by
<br />Council member Jennifer Gimbel, of the Colorado Attorney General's Office. The discussion also
<br />featured remarks by another Council member, Professor Chuck DuMars of the University of New
<br />Mexico School of Law in Albuquerque, who spoke on interjurisdictional compacts as tools for
<br />watershed management. Kara Gillon, of the Defenders of Wildlife in Washington, D.C., related
<br />experiences in the Lower Colorado River and the Middle Rio Grande. James Lochhead, of
<br />Brownstein Hyatt & Farber in Glenwood Springs, Colorado, brought an international perspective,
<br />contrasting the experiences of the Great Lakes and the Colorado River.
<br />The conference concluded focusing on what makes watershed processes work. Reed Benson,
<br />with WaterWatch of Oregon, provided the "pessimist's perspective." He cautioned participants that
<br />watershed groups aren't the panacea for all water - related concerns. Mark Smith, Massachusetts
<br />Executive Office of Environmental Affairs, relayed the results and lessons learned from the
<br />Massachusetts Watershed Initiative. The last presenter was William Stell, Jr., with the law firm of
<br />Preston Gates Ellis, in Seattle, Washington. He addressed what he found to be the key ingredients
<br />for the emergence of successful watershed management initiatives.
<br />16
<br />
|